Alphecca

I spent about $200 on a kodak Z700 about two years ago with 4 mp and 5X optical zoom and can tell the difference when using it compared to a friends cheapo camera like the one you bought. Optical zoom is always a must if you care about picture quality since digital zoom lowers the picture quality.

If you are intersted I have a pictures link on my site and can see the sharpness.

Today that same $200 will buy you a kodak Z710 with 7.1 mp and 10X optical zoom, although I am still happy with the one I bought and will be keeping it till it dies.

Like you, Pete, I cannot stress enough that optical zoom is SO MUCH more important than digital zoom. That's where my Sony, with it's 3/4" wide glass lens really shines.

My old Sony Mavica still takes great pictures. I still get compliments on the quality even though it is only 1.6 megapixels. It looks much better than higher rated cameras. The only reason I would look for something else is size. This thing was made to take floppy disks or memory sticks so it is quite large.

I got an Olympus 720 for Africa, and it has ridden in a pouch on my belt for almost a year. Flash is crap and I keep it switched off, but it is small, waterproof & shock protected. Digital zoom stays switched off (its a con, you get as good or better results cropping on the computer)and the close up mode is brilliant. on butterflies, you can even see the scales on the wings. It gets a bath once in a while, to wash off all the abraisive dust, which something I can't do with my D70. I look at some of the cameras at work that were really expensive a few years ago, and it's like comparing a 1980's PC with a modern laptop.

While we are talking digicams, try googling photomodeler. it allows you to construct scale 3D cad models from digital photos. Just the thing to record that rare antique lever action with...

As a professional photographer, many people ask me for advice for buying a digital SLR. My advice is always the same "Buy the cheapest, name brand body you can and spend as much money as the bank will loan you on the lenses".

Me? I actually need all those extra buttons and settings. I use them all the time. But for most people, you want to point and shoot and get a clear picture. Therefor you want glass lens with a large aperture.

Oh, and this
"This Digiatal Concepts camera has all the resolution of a Democrat controlled congress."
is definitely the quote of the day.

My wife lost old Olympus digital SLR, so I picked up a snapshot camera to use while saving some funds for another decent camera.

I ended up with a Cannon Powershot 630. A little more money, but it's got a decent lens, and takes great pictures... for a snapshot camera.

I'm now looking at a Nikon D40 :)

f2.8 is actually quite respectable. I mean, not impressive in a film camera or DSLR, but on par with even a good digital point-and-shoot.

(Speaking of battery life, my Canon A520 is sparing on batteries, barely using them when off.
The real key to battery life is to not use the LCD finder, but for that to work well, you need a tolerable optical finder.

The Canon, of course, has one, and I'm very happy with it in general; its replacement will probably be a newer Canon.)

Sure, Minox did better in terms of size, but at a huge cost premium. (A new TLX costs well over a thousand dollars, and while I don't know what the 35GT type cameras cost, they can't have been cheap new.

But the Ukranian copies are like $40 plus shipping, and when they work they have excellent optics, and they're mucking tiny.)

(That reminds me, someday my Minox C will be back from being repaired...)

Jeff;

Absolutely, put your money into the optics. They're what count. I love my Canon Digital Rebel XT with their 28-135 IS lens. Haven't used 35mm since I got it (still do some medium format stuff, though).

You can get a nice pocket digital made by Canon or Sony on eBay at reasonable prices.

Keith, thank you for the recommendation on photomodeler. Very interesting.

I keep one of the drugstore cheepies in my glove box, still in the foil wrapping, in case of an accident or unusual incident. When I had a boat I kept one there too.

Here's a question: What's a good way to spend as little as possible on a passably good digital camera for a child of, say, eight or nine who wants to shoot pictures? Simplicity is good, both in terms of the kid's ability to use the camera and to avoid having things to screw up or break. On the other hand, simplicity is bad if the inexpensiveness of the thing means you need to work around deficiencies. And, of course, sturdiness is key. Any ideas?

I think that might be the point (or use) of cameras like this. You don't mind if it's broken or lost. Unfortunately, it also means the camera won't "grow" with the child as he gets older. That's why my Olympus (for $129) is such a good deal. The kid won't be frustrated by the results.

Or, look for a good used camera on eBay.

Some of the small Olympus (they call them MJU outside the US, I forget what they call them your side)digitals are water resistant and really tough as well as taking good photos. some of those from last year with about 4MP should be pretty reasonable value.

Sort of kicking myself for buying a nikon DSLR, the Cannon ones can use the older cannon lenses with full metering compatibility, and some of the new cannon lenses way outshine the nikon ones (which they can also use with an adaptor, but you cant put a cannon lens on a nikon)
keith